Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: Looking more and more likely all the time... (Score 2) 500 500

Ok name me one of the basic physical laws - like say Ohm's law, the gravity law, the charge law, the gas laws, etc that has been proven incorrect. Like I said - we may not understand things completely. We might have to add on to these laws or fine tune them for special cases. But nothing in physics is getting "re-written", although sometimes it gets written in a completely different language depending on the context. However every new addition must necessarily fit within the context of the old. Otherwise how could it exist in our universe? Yes there are places on the map marked "Here Be Dragonnes", but now we know exactly how those dragons must behave. Multiplication does not invalidate addition.

Comment Re: Looking more and more likely all the time... (Score 5, Insightful) 500 500

Modern physics is never incorrect. Although it can be misunderstood at times. In the same way that relativity does NOT disprove Newton it confirms it, but extends it. Who would have thought that a little denominator with square root 1-(v squared / c squared) was missing, especially since if v = 0 then the whole denominator ends up being one...which means that all previous laws are valid exactly as they are. Science is not about great schisms where meanings and understandings are suddenly reversed from one generation to the next. That's politics and religion. Science is about progress, with every additional step necessarily building on the steps that were before it. Of course sometimes when you're standing a few steps higher up you get a better overall view of your surroundings and realize that maybe you were misinterpreting a few things before but now you understand them perfectly... until someone comes and puts another little step under your feet and you can see even further...

Comment Re:Blimey (Score 2) 500 500

they're just really efficient in a vacuum.

Fixed that for you. Well, for your reader anyway - you probably understand it. Because of the way these things work, they are just about useless anywhere other than a vacuum. The only way you can spend a tiny tiny amount of energy accelerating particles to massive speeds is when there's nothing else in their way for them to bounce off of. But if you are not in any kind of rush for your delta v and are in near total vacuum this is almost a perfect engine.

Comment Re:I don't think you want an OSI license. (Score 1) 85 85

Creative commons licenses don't fit their preferred use case, because it allows redistribution:

A single license that gives users access to the code but limits the ability to redistribute the code and distribute patches to the "core" is what we'd prefer.

More generally, creative commons licenses aren't an appropriate fit to software. They're designed with creative works in mind and protect the expression of a work, rather than the way in which that expression is created.

Comment Re:No decrease does not mean an increase (Score 1) 391 391

Today we have far more stuff then our parents ever did.

Er, today there are far more people still living with their parents than ever. If you want to measure "standard of living" in terms of gadgets go ahead. In the 1950's one man could support his wife and several kids with a house fully paid for, health costs were not a problem, etc. Today? You are a slave to the bank. Don't you or your wife dream of getting sick. Can you afford that baby, and more importantly will mom and dad mind you adding yet another family member into the already crowded house?

Our business in life is not to succeed but to continue to fail in high spirits. -- Robert Louis Stevenson

Working...